>>> Oh Gene, Please don't go. You da man. Why couldn't you have just posted an > image of the real thing? You are doing just fine, without the self > promotion here. i was just reading thru this thread for the first time, having a good old time until.......i've been hanging around swaylocks for about a year, getting lots of help and sometimes even being able to dispense advice to someone who's asking about something that i actually have experience with. so for me swaylocks has always been a 'bottom to top' environment where novices like me benefit from the experience of advanced folks who aren't afraid to share their knowledge. herb, gene, jim phillips, tom, tom, tom and tom.....you guys are sort of the glue that hold the threads together. i sure hope that gene meant "no more posts" only in regards to this thread (he probably did). to be honest, if we have to see an established, and evidently well-regarded shaper take issue with the work of another, it would be a lot easier to stomach if the discussion were based on the hydrodynamics of surfboards instead of, let me see....i'm having difficulty coming up with the right word...taunts of a personal nature?? making people disappear doesn't make one 'magic'. i feel like a kid who's telling an adult to behave.
Sorry to pop your bubble J.Bird ,but I build what I want, when I want,and lack from nothing............by the way I shaped Dyno's in the 70s as well.Steve knows who I am,and who I shaped under.Herb.
Thank You! Ramon It needed to be said,and you did it like a gentleman! jim>>> i was just reading thru this thread for the first time, having a good old > time until.......i've been hanging around swaylocks for about a year, > getting lots of help and sometimes even being able to dispense advice to > someone who's asking about something that i actually have experience with. > so for me swaylocks has always been a 'bottom to top' environment where > novices like me benefit from the experience of advanced folks who aren't > afraid to share their knowledge. herb, gene, jim phillips, tom, tom, tom > and tom.....you guys are sort of the glue that hold the threads together. > i sure hope that gene meant "no more posts" only in regards to > this thread (he probably did). to be honest, if we have to see an > established, and evidently well-regarded shaper take issue with the work > of another, it would be a lot easier to stomach if the discussion were > based on the hydrodynamics of surfboards instead of, let me see....i'm > having difficulty coming up with the right word...taunts of a personal > nature?? making people disappear doesn't make one 'magic'.>>> i feel like a kid who's telling an adult to behave.
It's not unlike me to seek out other shapers to learn new things,even today!Herb.
i do agree that knowing who's done what in the past is important, but come on....when it comes down to it unless you're one of maybe three big names, building surfboards is peanuts. "i did this first, he copied him, blah blah blah". i see every different kind of longboard retro rig in the water at malibu and elsewhere and it isn't the board that makes a difference, i don't care how nuanced the rider is. a log is a log is a log. when i see pics of a kid in indonesia absolutely ripping on an old broken board or old tourist boogie board i wonder if any of it really matters. when i'm surfing on a wave the last thing on my mind is who first did tucked rails/bottom contours/50-50 rails/blah blah blah. i love shaping my own boards and learning new/old things about the process and have tons of respect for the true master craftsmen of the past and present, but honestly i think the whole tight lipped/ mysto/guru shaper attitude is mostly due to the fact that they don't want the average surfer to know how easy shaping is. it's certainly not rocket science. if i was going to spend thirty years refining a model it'd better fly, literally, and drive me to and from the beach too.
I'd settle for my boards to watch my kids once and awhile!!!Herb
I just read the string of Swaylock’s Design Forum posts from 2001, on The Ugly surfboard design. I was surprised to see a post from you "Magic Man" who stated that he spoke with Gary Seaman who said he designed The Ugly.
Not True! I designed The Ugly and the Super Ugly as I swore under oath during the trial of the law suit I filed against Con Colburn for breach of contract. Con was a liar as was proven in court during a weak-long trial, which I won 100%.
I had been designing my surfboards before I joined the Con Team and after I left the Con Team. Shapers that shaped my designs after I left Con include, Mike Olivares, Tim Pharris, Pat Ryan and Don Kadawaki.
I told Con what I wanted when I got him to agree to enter me in the Morey contest in 1966.
I was fluent in the language of surfboard design due to the fact that I started designing with Dewey Weber, who taught me to keep track of the measurements of my surfboards starting with the first board he gave me. I was 14 years old, in early 1963, when I join Dewey’s team and he gave me my first new surfboard, for free. I visited the factory as often as I could and usually hung in the shaping room with Iggy, who would explain the aqua-dynamics of shapes, and Dewey would join in often.
After a year, I had a hand in designing my boards. Everyone was into nose riding and Pipeline was the frontier. My influences were Dewey, Phil and Lance. I had watched the development of the Performer and marketing of it over the next couple of years. I was climbing the competition ladder and wanted my own model.
In the late fall of 1965, I left Dewey and joined Ernie Tanaka who offered to make my own model, which I designed and it was a nose-rider. Unfortunately, Ernie didn’t have the marketing money to promote and advertise my model, so the sales were lackluster.
Roy Seaman, a good friend of mine who had been on Dewey’s team and was on the top-ten team of MSA with me, had moved to Con Surfboards. In the early part of 1966, Roy lured me to Con with the promise that Con would offer me my own model and let me design my own boards. Con indeed offered a contract for my own model and he let me design my own boards.
Gary shaped my boards and so did Roy. Both knew that I liked to design and I was constantly testing new theories. I originated many designs before I got to Con, and I originated The Ugly.
I told Con what I wanted: A nose as wide as can be gotten and suggested 20", a concave that is deep and long and a kicked up tail. The wide nose was the key difference, not the tail. It was the nose that became the key guide for making the template. Con told me Gary would shape it.
Gary knew it was being shaped for me and incorporated what I liked – a thin nose and thin tail, with a good kick at both ends. All the contours were blended – no hard edges. Gary put it all together like any good shaper would. Did he design it? No, I did! The Ugly came together because of me and my ideas. Gary was the great shaper that shaped it.
I did not make the template, Gary did. Does that make him the designer? No, because Roy or any good shaper could have put my ideas together and that board would have become the prototype Ugly.
The nose became blunt because it was the only logical curve that made sense when you make the width of the nose 20+” wide, one foot back from the tip.
Was the board to my liking when I got it? The composition did what I wanted it to and that was to create a strong lift from under the nose that I could control so I could win the contest.
I have wanted one since the article in the U.S. longboard magazine about ten years ago.
'The Ugly' is as desirable today as it ever was and I am sure it is just as functional . What a wonderful piece of history your design is. Thank You for making it.
Gary Seaman designed and built the Ugly in his garage at Latigo. No questions about it. His brother Roy and Gary were both at Con at least by 1963. Bob Purvey's recollection is wrong. Gary was a real design freak and all kinds of bizarro ideas in the early 60s.